COMPLAINT REGARDING INVENTION PROMOTER
DATE OF CORRESPONDENCE: November 15, 2008
Name of the Invention Promotion Company: Davison Design
Invention Promoter's Address: 595 Alpha Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15238-2911
Complainant's Name: Brenda Warpula
Complainant's Address: 3316 Government Rd., Thunder Bay, ON, P76 1U8 , CA
Customer's Name: Brenda Warpula
WHAT IS YOUR COMPLAINT?
Name of mass media invention promoter advertised in: Internet
Invention promotion service offered to be performed:
Explanation of complaint between customer and invention promoter:
My name is Brenda Warpula and the world must be aware of a dreadful experience I went through with an invention marketing and promotion company known as Davison Design in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
In January 2007, I had a doable concept for a product and considered I had nothing to lose by locating a company to commercialize it for me. Boy was I wrong! Living in Thunder Bay, Ontario, a small northern city, there was minimal resources so I went to the Internet to find a reputable company to provide me with professional direction. Eventually I was contacted by Davison Design. Their employees responded with nothing but excitement for my product idea. In fact,  told me that “he could not believe it was not out there already!” My ego boosted and believing him, a highly trained marketing professional, I hired Davison Design to commercialize it for me, as I have no experience in such matters. Looking back, I now see how wrong I was to hire Davison.
The attached complaint outlines line-item by line-item my complaints. Consequently, I am now of the personal opinion that I was deliberately misled, deceived, and given to understand that it was patentable. Therefore, a rush was put on me to file a Provisional Patent Application. To this end, I scraped up from my friends and family over $17,000 (Canadian) to have Davison Design get it into the marketplace. Needless to say, it got no where fast and what I am left holding is a stack of what now appears to be meaningless paperwork.
-
My invention is not a true representation of what I submitted to Davison originally on January 24, 2007, nor is it a true representation of what they wrote for me called a “Provisional Patent Application” which they had me mail to the patent office. It was changed by Davison engineers after which, it became “their” invention not mine.
It doesn’t look or work like the directions I submitted on January 24, 007. On May 1, 2007 , Director of New Products, told me it had to be changed from what I submitted to meet their “specialty” contacts who know it can be changed to whatever they wanted, but that’s not the point. The point is, it is not what I submitted to Davison. I told him and have continued to tell him over-and-over that “I don’t like it”, to which I’ve been told (quote), “it has to be that way.” Supposedly it has to be that way to appeal to the manufacturing equipment, facilities, and marketing of the industrial supplier Hospital Specialty Supply. After they submitted it (made a phone call, as they don’t do anything by mail or email, only by fax when it has to be in writing and as per and ), the company allegedly had no interest in it anyway. I’ve asked Davison to change it back to what I originally submitted and they will not make any changes unless the targeted corporation requests it.
Additionally, I spoke to someone in the IP Licensing field I found on the web in a chat room who says she knows Hospital Specialty and told me they no longer manufacture in-house and if they were to manufacture, they would outsource it off-shore. They are now only a “supplier.” No wonder they were not interested!
-
I paid Davison U.S. $15,985.87 to patent and market what I thought was my invention but it has since become their invention, as it no longer resembles what I submitted to them. They claim to have sent out my product idea to 1500 corporations. Davison also claimed that a single phone call presentation was made to Hospital Specialty Supply (they will not prove or disclose other companies to me whom they have made contact with via phone as they apparently do not communicate anything in writing or very little). However, they provided a copy of a letter they supposedly faxed to them BUT the date and year on it was 2000!!! I did not contact Davison until 2007!!! A reasonable person might deduce they took a stock letter in their computer system, added the name/address of Hospital Specialty, but forgot to change the date. Also a blank mail form was used, claiming that was proof that Davison mailed my information to them.
-
I have been informed by , Licensing Department, that I now have to pay an additional $335 for each new company they select to call for promotion of my invention. I’ve paid $15,985.87 and now they want more!!!!!!!!! There is no mention I am aware of in my contract that I must keep paying after a certain number of companies have been contacted. The next company contact is . I’m not sure why because I’ve already paid a fortune and got nothing of value but a bunch of faxed letters, a PPA that does not represent my invention and an Inventegration package I’ve no idea what to do with.
-
The Provisional Patent they faxed for me to mail to the US Patent Office is not a representation of what I submitted to them. I spoke to about it and was told that’s all I’m going to get, so I had to mail it. It expires in three months in December 2008. What a complete waste of time and money it was!!!
-
I still have not been provided a prototype. I’ve spoken to about it and she told me previously that it was in a location they couldn’t get to so she couldn’t send it to me and besides they need it for presentations? How exactly do they need it for “presentations” as it contradicts her statement that presentations are done over the phone. I’ve continued to press her for its measurements.
The last time I pressed for its size, I was finally told it was 17x11x12 and it weighed 2 lbs. That is entirely too large and weighty for the invention I submitted to them. It appears they are not going to send it to me, so once again I can only assume it exists, even though I’ve paid for it. I recall signing a Shipping Agreement, but I would like to bet if I called , they would not know about my product. The problem here is that Davison’s contract forbids clients from contacting companies they allegedly called.
-
While on the phone to , I heard what sounded like a recording of my voice. I asked her if our phone calls were being recorded, to which she said, “maybe, possibly, most likely by Davisin.” What Davison is doing is illegal in the state of Pennsylvania per “Can We Tape”: www.rcfp.org/taping/index.html.
-
I’ve sent a letter back asking them to fix the issues I’ve brought up on many occasions as listed above, but it has not been responded to via mail (written). has phoned me and told me that Davison will not respond via mail (written, unless administration approves it). She told me that the prototype will not be changed and that a refund is not an option. called from licensing and said that changing the prototype or a refund is not an option. On September 24, 2008, , Assistant to the VP of Licensing, called to inform me that there was a response (from Davison). She said the prototype is not going to be changed and that a refund is NOT AN OPTION! MOREOVER, DAVISON WILL NOT REPLY IN WRITING, WHICH I HAVE REQUESTED PRIMARILY BECAUSE I CAN NO LONGER TRUST THE COMPANY! Their contract stipulates I have to give them 30-days notice. A second letter was sent on September 24th to the company with the contractual obligations, which allow Davison to correct their wrongs within 30 days.
-
On October 30th at 10:00 am, I had a phone appointment with , VP of Licensing with Davison. He wanted to discuss the issues regarding the September 24th letter, which was the letter I sent after the Sept 4th letter, stating that it was the second request to have my issue resolved by Davison. Frank said, “Your request to have things written in writing is denied because they don’t have to give you anything in writing”. Frank seemed to have no interest or knowledge of the contents that was in the original complaint letter sent on September 24th. He did not have the letter in front of him to discuss the real issues I had with Davison, yet he said he disagrees with the statements I made. How can he disagree with any statements when he doesn’t have knowledge of the contents within the letter of September 4th stating my complaints to Davison!!!!! He told me “this phone call will be cut short and someone above (him) will contact me regarding the issues”. As of November 15, 2008, Davison has not contacted me.
-
In the meantime, I hired a professional Patent Search Company to do a patent search and an attorney to render a legal opinion on whether he deems it more likely patentable than not. The attorney’s response in written form on November 14, 2008 made it clear Davison’s invention was not patentable, since the relevant features are disclosed in patents already. The bottom line is Davison employees unfairly took advantage of my naivety when it comes to patenting and commercializing inventions. I relied on what they told me as they represented themselves as professionals.
-
In my opinion, I was misled and more importantly, my invention was obviously not acceptable in the form it was, so they changed it to suit their fancy. All I am asking is to be made whole and put back in the condition I was before they added their creation to it. As to all those alleged other 1499 manufacturers they supposedly contacted, not only do I question their existence, but it’s no wonder they were not interested after they reviewed Davison’s creative spin (adding a toilet paper hanging below a contraption NOT part of my invention). Likely their original patent search found it not patentable but the sales team execs. couldn't let an enthusiastic novice like me walk, so they had their engineering department render what I now know is called a design-around. But it was NOT part of the invention I submitted to them and frankly looks like a misplaced appendage.
Signed: /s/Brenda Warpula Date: November 15, 2008 |
=online
business system 
=fees 
=forms
=help 
=laws/regulations 
=definition
(glossary)